Search results

This study aims to document the time varying risk premia for market, size, value and momentum factors for an emerging market using a sophisticated conditional asset pricing model. The focus of this study is Turkish stock market denominated in local currency with its peculiar risk premia.

The authors employ Gagliardini et al.'s (2016) econometric method that uses cross-sectional and time series information simultaneously to infer the path of risk premia from individual stocks.

Using this methodology, the authors assess several conditioning information and conclude that local dividend yield, inflation and exchange rates have the most explanatory power. The authors document the time varying risk premia in Turkey over three decades.

Existing studies on dynamic estimation of risk premia lack a consensus as to which state variables should be included and to what extent they impact the magnitude of the premium. The authors extend the conditioning information set beyond the ones existing in the literature to determine variables that are specifically important for an emerging market.

The authors consider a variety of cryptocurrency and equity risk factors as potential forces that drive cryptocurrency returns and carry risk premiums. In a cross-section of 2,000 biggest cryptocurrencies during 2014–2020, only downside market risk, cryptocurrency size and cryptocurrency policy uncertainty factors are systematically priced with significant premiums. Cryptocurrencies, which have greater exposures to these factors, yield higher returns subsequently. Equity market risk, particularly equity downside market risk, appears to be more important than cryptocurrency market risk, suggesting greater linkages between cryptocurrency and equity markets than we used to think. Global and the US equity factors are more relevant for the cryptocurrency market than local factors from other markets. However, there is no evidence that exposure to momentum, volatility and Fama–French factors is compensated by higher returns.

We examine the incremental cross-sectional role of several common risk factors related to size, book-to-market, and momentum in size-and-momentum-sorted portfolios. Unlike the existing literature, which focuses on the conditional mean specification only, we evaluate the common risk factors’ incremental explanatory power in the cross-sectional characterization of both average return and conditional volatility. We also investigate the role of ex-ante market risk in the cross-section. The empirical results demonstrate that the size-and-momentum-based risk factors explain a significant portion of the cross-sectional average returns and cross-sectional conditional volatility of the benchmark equity portfolios. We find that the Fama–French (1993) factors and the ex-ante market risk are priced in the cross-sectional conditional volatility. We conclude that the size-and-momentum-based factors provide a source of risk that is independent of the Fama–French factors as well as ex-post and ex-ante market risk. Our results bolster the risk-based explanation of the size and momentum effects.

Throughout the 21st century, US households have experienced unprecedented levels of leverage. This dynamic has been exacerbated by income shortfalls during the COVID-19 crisis. Leveraging and deleveraging decisions affect household consumption. This study investigates the effect of the dynamics of household leverage and consumption on the stock market.

The authors explore the relation between household leverage and consumption in the context of the consumption capital asset pricing model (CCAPM). The authors test the model's implication that leverage has a negative risk premium by transforming the asset pricing restriction into an unconditional linear factor model and estimate the model using the general method of moments procedure. The authors run time-series regressions to estimate individual stocks' exposures to leverage, and cross-sectional regressions to investigate the leverage risk premium.

The authors show that shocks to household debt have strong and lasting effects on consumption growth. The authors extend the CCAPM to accommodate this effect and find, using various test assets, a negative risk premium associated with household deleveraging. Looking at individual stocks the authors show that the deleveraging risk premium is not explained by well-known risk factors.

This paper contributes to the literature on the role of leverage in economics and finance by establishing a relation between household leverage and spending decisions. The authors provide novel evidence that households' leveraging and deleveraging decisions can be a fundamental and influential force in determining asset prices. Further, this paper argues that household leverage might explain the small, persistent, and predictable component in consumption growth hypothesised in the long-run risk asset pricing literature.

This study takes a novel approach to testing the efficacy of technical analysis. Rather than testing specific trading rules as is typically done in the literature, we rely on institutional portfolio managers’ statements about whether and how intensely they use technical analysis, irrespective of the form in which they implement it. In our sample of more than 10,000 portfolios, about one-third of actively managed equity and balanced funds use technical analysis. We compare the investment performance of funds that use technical analysis versus those that do not, using five metrics. Mean and median (3 and 4-factor) alpha values are generally slightly higher for a cross section of funds using technical analysis, but performance volatility is also higher. Benchmark-adjusted returns are also higher, particularly when market prices are declining. The most remarkable finding is that portfolios with greater reliance on technical analysis have elevated skewness and kurtosis levels relative to portfolios that do not use technical analysis. Funds using technical analysis appear to have provided a meaningful advantage to their investors, albeit in an unexpected way.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the temporal impact of individual and institutional investor sentiment on sin stock returns.

The authors estimate vector autoregressive models (VARs) to assess the dynamic relationships amongst pure sin returns and both types of investor sentiment. The justification for estimating VARs is that it allows one to study the potential influence that shocks (i.e. innovations) in individual and institutional investor sentiment might have on pure sin returns over time. Sin stock returns are separated into a market-based and pure sin component. Additionally, the authors split both measures of investor sentiment into rational- and irrational-based components.

This study finds that shocks to both individual and institutional rational-based sentiment positively influence pure sin returns for up to four months. However, irrational-based shocks have a positive, weaker and insignificant effect on pure sin returns. In addition, the results for the pure sin portfolio are compared to the S&P 500 and a comparables portfolio. The results show that sin stocks are less responsive than the S&P and the comparables portfolio to shocks in investor sentiment.

This study addresses some of the limitations found in the only prior study of sin stocks and investor sentiment (Perez Liston, 2016). Specially, this study investigates the link between sin stocks and sentiment in a dynamic context and also focuses the analysis on pure sin returns.

The equity premium of the S&P 500 index is explained in this paper by several variables that can be grouped into fundamental, behavioral, and macroeconomic factors. We hypothesize that the statistical significance of these variables changes across economic regimes. The three regimes we consider are the low‐volatility, medium‐volatility, and high‐volatility regimes in contrast to previous studies that do not differentiate across economic regimes. By using the three‐state Markov switching regime econometric methodology, we confirm that the statistical significance of the independent variables representing fundamentals, macroeconomic conditions, and a behavioral variable changes across economic regimes. Our findings offer an improved understanding of what moves the equity premium across economic regimes than what we can learn from single‐equation estimation. Our results also confirm the significance of momentum as a behavioral variable across all economic regimes

This paper aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of whether stock returns in Europe are best characterized by country-specific or Europe-wide versions of widely used factor models.

To estimate the cost of equity in Europe, both region-wide and nationally, the Fama and French (2012) three-factor and Carhart (1997) four-factor models are used.

The results show that although the value and momentum premiums are present on a Europe-wide basis, the size premium is country-specific.

The paper offers an explanation to the puzzle of why Fama and French (2012) detect value and momentum premiums but no size premium in Europe. Furthermore, the results shed new light on these premiums and present a challenge to existing applications of widely used factor models.

Prior research on meeting or beating earnings thresholds documents that firms with earnings momentum are awarded with valuation premiums. However, it is unclear from this strand of literature why this is the case. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the effects of time-varying earnings persistence on earnings momentum and their pricing effects.

This study exploits a firm that reports earnings momentum as research setting to examine whether earnings persistence is significantly higher for firms with consecutive earnings increases. In addition, it investigates a relation between earnings momentum and fundamentals-driven earnings persistence and estimates return associations of earnings momentum conditional on economic-based persistence of earnings.

The empirical evidence suggests that firms with earnings momentum reflect higher time-varying earnings persistence. It further reveals that longer duration of earnings momentum is associated with higher fundamentals-driven earnings persistence. More importantly, valuation premiums are exclusively assigned to earnings momentum determined by strong firm fundamentals, not momentum itself.

This study provides new empirical evidence that valuation premiums accrued to firms with earnings momentum are conditional on time-varying earnings persistence. The research implications are relevant to investors, regulators and auditors, as the results bring conclusions that earnings momentum reflects successful business models not poor accounting quality. This leads to a more complete view of earnings momentum and helps allocate resources when evaluating earnings-momentum firms.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of equity market misvaluation on manager behavior. Using a sample of 535 French-listed over 2000–2018, the authors analyze whether corporate investment decision is sensitive to equity market overvaluation.

The study adopts market-to-book (M/B) decomposition developed by Rhodes-Kropf and Viswanathan (2004, RKV) that proxies for market misvaluation at the firm and industry levels. The authors conducted a long-term performance analysis via a portfolio sorting procedure and a Carhart (1997) four-factor pricing model. The authors tested the relationship between equity misvaluation, corporate investment decisions and equity issuance. The authors ran several robustness tests.

The empirical results show that equity market misvaluation affects corporate investment positively as the stock price deviates further away from its fundamental. Based on market timing theory, the authors find that corporate investment occurs in periods of high valuation motivated by equity issuance to benefit from the low cost of capital. This effect is more prominent for financially constrained firms. Consistent with the catering channel, the authors find that the misvaluation-investment nexus is more pronounced in firms with short-horizon investors. By examining the stocks’ long-term performance of misvalued firms, via a sorting portfolio procedure, the authors find that undervalued firms outperform and generate higher abnormal returns (Jensen’s alpha) than overvalued firms, suggesting that mispricing-driven investment appear to be short-lived and lead to lower return in the long term.

Corporate decision-makers and governance structures should pay attention to the rationality of the corporate investment decision in the context of equity market misvaluation. Managers who focus on maximizing the stock market value in the short-run at the expense of its long-term performance must give preference to value-creating investment, not driven by an external mechanism such as equity market mispricing. More generally, investors and portfolio managers must take into account the market mispricing process in decision-making. Nonetheless, from the portfolio sorting perspective, decision-makers must act in terms of high governance quality to mitigate suboptimal investment due to stock market mispricing (Jensen, 2005). Finally, equity market overvaluation, leading managers to invest via equity financing in particular, should be a signal to attract investors’ attention to seize the window of opportunity and embark on a short-term portfolio strategy. Such a strategy promises high returns in the short term.

This paper investigates jointly two theoretical channels: equity market timing and catering. The authors propose for the analysis three components of the M/B decomposition to dissociate market misvaluation at the firm and industry level from the fundamental component of market value (growth). This procedure provides a better understanding of the role of firm and industry misvaluation in explaining corporate investments. The authors provide evidence of the equity market misvaluation via a portfolio sorting procedure and a Carhart (1997) four-factor pricing model. The authors examine the effect of misvaluation on both the investment and the financing decisions.